|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] x86: hold mm->page_table_lock while doing vmallo
To: |
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@xxxxxxxxxx> |
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] x86: hold mm->page_table_lock while doing vmalloc_sync |
From: |
Larry Woodman <lwoodman@xxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: |
Thu, 03 Feb 2011 15:59:13 -0500 |
Cc: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, "Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> |
Delivery-date: |
Thu, 03 Feb 2011 15:02:24 -0800 |
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
In-reply-to: |
<20110203024838.GI5843@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
References: |
<4CB76E8B.2090309@xxxxxxxx> <4CC0AB73.8060609@xxxxxxxx> <20110203024838.GI5843@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Reply-to: |
lwoodman@xxxxxxxxxx |
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Red Hat/3.1.7-3.el6_0 Thunderbird/3.1.7 |
On 02/02/2011 09:48 PM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
Hello,
Larry (CC'ed) found a problem with the patch in subject. When
USE_SPLIT_PTLOCKS is not defined (NR_CPUS == 2) it will deadlock in
ptep_clear_flush_notify in rmap.c because it's sending IPIs with the
page_table_lock already held, and the other CPUs now spins on the
page_table_lock with irq disabled, so the IPI never runs. With
CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE=y this deadlocks happens even with
USE_SPLIT_PTLOCKS defined so it become visible but it needs to be
fixed regardless (for NR_CPUS == 2).
I'd like to understand why the pgd_lock needs irq disabled, it sounds
too easy that I can just remove the _irqsave, doesn't it?
A pgd_free comment says it can run from irq. page_table_lock having to
be taken there is for Xen only, but other archs also uses
spin_lock_irqsave(pgd_lock) so I guess it's either common code, or
it's superfluous and not another Xen special requirement.
If we could remove that _irqsave like below it'd solve it... But
clearly something must be taking the pgd_lock from irq. (using a
rwlock would also be possible as long as nobody takes it in write mode
during irq, but if it's pgd_free that really runs in irq, that would
need the write_lock so it wouldn't be a solution).
I'm trying this fix and the VM_BUG_ON never triggered yet.
In short: who takes the pgd_lock from an irq? (__mmdrop shouldn't but
maybe I'm overlooking some aio bit?)
This is the specifics:
The problem is with THP. The page reclaim code calls page_referenced_one()
which takes the mm->page_table_lock on one CPU before sending an IPI to other
CPU(s):
On CPU1 we take the mm->page_table_lock, send IPIs and wait for a response:
page_referenced_one(...)
if (unlikely(PageTransHuge(page))) {
pmd_t *pmd;
spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock);
pmd = page_check_address_pmd(page, mm, address,
PAGE_CHECK_ADDRESS_PMD_FLAG);
if (pmd&& !pmd_trans_splitting(*pmd)&&
pmdp_clear_flush_young_notify(vma, address, pmd))
referenced++;
spin_unlock(&mm->page_table_lock);
} else {
CPU2 can race in vmalloc_sync_all() because it disables interrupt(preventing a
response to the IPI from CPU1) and takes the pgd_lock then spins in the
mm->page_table_lock which is already held on CPU1.
spin_lock_irqsave(&pgd_lock, flags);
list_for_each_entry(page,&pgd_list, lru) {
pgd_t *pgd;
spinlock_t *pgt_lock;
pgd = (pgd_t *)page_address(page) + pgd_index(address);
pgt_lock =&pgd_page_get_mm(page)->page_table_lock;
spin_lock(pgt_lock);
At this point the system is deadlocked. The pmdp_clear_flush_young_notify
needs to do its PDG business with the page_table_lock held then release that
lock before sending the IPIs to the other CPUs.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread> |
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] x86: hold mm->page_table_lock while doing vmalloc_sync,
Larry Woodman <=
|
|
|
|
|